"Understanding Libertarian Morality"

[Selene]

Folks:

On page eleven (11) the authors refer to the Moral Foundation Questionnaire.

http://faculty.virginia.edu/haidtlab/mft/index.php?t=questionnaires

Try taking it, I just did.

Adam

[caroljane]

Folks:

On page eleven (11) the authors refer to the Moral Foundation Questionnaire.

http://faculty.virginia.edu/haidtlab/mft/index.php?t=questionnaires

Try taking it, I just did.

Adam

How did you do it so fast?

[Robert Campbell]

Still working on the paper. I read psychology articles in English more slowly than I read nearly anything in French.

I hope no one will reject what Haidt et al. are saying simply because they are generalizing about personality traits.

Meanwhile, Haidt is definitely walking his talk. Here's a report of what he just said at the Personality and Social Psychology conference:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08tier.html?_r=2&ref=science

Robert Campbell

[Brant Gaede]

Folks:

On page eleven (11) the authors refer to the Moral Foundation Questionnaire.

http://faculty.virgi...=questionnaires

Try taking it, I just did.

Adam

I did about ten questions and stopped. They had no context so I could imagine different answers for different imagined contexts. There was also a hangup on the liberal-conservative thing. This crap is designed to be computer processed. I wonder where they get their money from.

--Brant

[Mike11]

Mind Blowing.

You know we need this in every field to correct the Liberal Bias reality has been known to assume.

"Biology 1000: A theory or Satan's Lie?"

"Anthropology 2000: Why dem dare spear chuckers need Christ and a shoe shining kit"

"Lit Crit 1000: Why we got rid of the other lit crit classes"

"Sociology 2000: Asian sweat shops and forced abortions, a success story"

This is a joke. There are more liberals in the university today because American Conservatives exist in the sixteenth century.

My days of not taking this board seriously are definitely coming to a middle

Edited February 8, 2011 by Joel Mac Donald

[caroljane]

Mind Blowing.

You know we need this in every field to correct the Liberal Bias reality has been known to assume.

"Biology 1000: A theory or Satan's Lie?"

"Anthropology 2000: Why dem dare spear chuckers need Christ and a shoe shining kit"

"Lit Crit 1000: Why we got rid of the other lit crit classes"

"Sociology 2000: Asian sweat shops and forced abortions, a success story"

This is a joke. There are more liberals in the university today because American Conservatives exist in the sixteenth century.

My days of not taking this board seriously are definitely coming to a middle

Your days of making me spill my coffe laughing are I fear just peaking.

In S&S

Daunce FOSI

Answer your mail will you

[caroljane]

Still working on the paper. I read psychology articles in English more slowly than I read nearly anything in French.

I hope no one will reject what Haidt et al. are saying simply because they are generalizing about personality traits.

Meanwhile, Haidt is definitely walking his talk. Here's a report of what he just said at the Personality and Social Psychology conference:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08tier.html?_r=2&ref=science

Robert Campbell

This is really good stuff. From a perspective we weren't expecting, a social scientist examines groupthink with data to back it up.

This guy is a real thinker who seems to learn about himself as well as his subject as he goes along.

I think I'm a Haidt fan. I wonder if he plays hockey.